"Speaking at a crowded auditorium at Howard University, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and other proponents of the Green New Deal — an ambitious plan to rid the U.S. economy of a reliance on fossil fuels — affirmed their progressive ideals while striking out at both conservative Republicans and moderate Democrats who have, according to her and other critics, done too little about global warming for too long.

In particular, Ocasio-Cortez, who is in her first term as a congresswoman representing the Bronx and Queens, seemed to criticize Joe Biden, who entered the U.S. Senate in 1973, 16 years before she was born. Speaking with a sense of urgency, Ocasio-Cortez described how NASA had been warned about climate change since 1989 and how more warnings came in the years thereafter, to little legislative effect.

“I will be damned if the same politicians who refused to act then come back today and say we need a 'middle of the road' approach to save our lives,” Ocasio-Cortez said.

Her remarks were obviously aimed at Biden, who is now running for president and is facing criticism for not speaking urgently enough about climate change. A spokesperson for Ocasio-Cortez did not deny that Biden was a target of remarks..."

I would be interested in hearing you explain what makes me a "shill" though. You know words have actual definitions, right?

That's funny. I've been pretty much ignoring you since you outed yourself to me, but I'll chime in now because other posters haven't seemed to notice. Faced with an opposing point of view you'll continue to question the person you are responding to on minutiae in order to bog down the discussion. Failing that you'll pretend that the person you are engaged with posted something other than what they posted to muddy the waters. When that also fails you'll pretend that you don't understand what the other person is posting to try to minimize or ignore the points that they have made. You're a shill because you troll for whatever the (D) hive mind puts out. It's incredibly obvious to me, and I pointed it out to you quite a while ago. Now, go ahead and continue trolling, shill.

That's funny. I've been pretty much ignoring you since you outed yourself to me, but I'll chime in now because other posters haven't seemed to notice. Faced with an opposing point of view you'll continue to question the person you are responding to on minutiae in order to bog down the discussion. Failing that you'll pretend that the person you are engaged with posted something other than what they posted to muddy the waters. When that also fails you'll pretend that you don't understand what the other person is posting to try to minimize or ignore the points that they have made. You're a shill because you troll for whatever the (D) hive mind puts out. It's incredibly obvious to me, and I pointed it out to you quite a while ago. Now, go ahead and continue trolling, shill.

Please give some examples of these very obvious dishonest tactics in action. Or is this just a drive by smear attempt as I suspect?

Please give some examples of these very obvious dishonest tactics in action. Or is this just a drive by smear attempt as I suspect?

I already did. The last time I engaged in a discussion with you. You blew it off with an unrelated sarcastic remark. I know that you're not really as stupid as you pretend to be, and I know that you are aware of the fact that you do the things that I mentioned. So, as I said: Go ahead and continue trolling, shill.

If he was worth a shit Biden wouldn't be stomping all over his worthless socialist ass.

The country doesn't want far left candidates.

Biden has all of the establishment support. The far left is split between Bernie and several other candidates. When they eventually drop out, he will likely gain more of that support than Biden will. It's also incredibly early and people aren't really paying attention. I would bet against Biden winning the nomination, though it wouldn't shock me at all if he won.

That's funny. I've been pretty much ignoring you since you outed yourself to me, but I'll chime in now because other posters haven't seemed to notice. Faced with an opposing point of view you'll continue to question the person you are responding to on minutiae in order to bog down the discussion. Failing that you'll pretend that the person you are engaged with posted something other than what they posted to muddy the waters. When that also fails you'll pretend that you don't understand what the other person is posting to try to minimize or ignore the points that they have made. You're a shill because you troll for whatever the (D) hive mind puts out. It's incredibly obvious to me, and I pointed it out to you quite a while ago. Now, go ahead and continue trolling, shill.

This is essentially the #1 tactic trumpers (or even republican never-trumpers like you?) use when talking about the left. See your post about calling everyone who disagrees with you literal nazis or whatever

I already did. The last time I engaged in a discussion with you. You blew it off with an unrelated sarcastic remark. I know that you're not really as stupid as you pretend to be, and I know that you are aware of the fact that you do the things that I mentioned. So, as I said: Go ahead and continue trolling, shill.

As I recall the discussion derailed when you got upset at me for asking you to restate your position so that I could understand it and you thought I was being dishonest and so you threw a tempter tantrum and refused to engage further. I don't really remember what the argument was at this point but I remember being very confused at your behavior.

This is essentially the #1 tactic trumpers (or even republican never-trumpers like you?) use when talking about the left. See your post about calling everyone who disagrees with you literal nazis or whatever

I'll go ahead and respond to every single one of the comments you made in that thread. It will take some time because of the way that your formatted your response, but we've had all of those discussions (again and again) on this very board.

You did say that people preferred Republicans. If more people consistently vote for Democrats to be President, it would seem to go against that theory whether or not they were actually elected by the process that we use to determine who should be President.

You did say that people preferred Republicans. If more people consistently vote for Democrats to be President, it would seem to go against that theory whether or not they were actually elected by the process that we use to determine who should be President.

As I recall the discussion derailed when you got upset at me for asking you to restate your position so that I could understand it and you thought I was being dishonest and so you threw a tempter tantrum and refused to engage further. I don't really remember what the argument was at this point but I remember being very confused at your behavior.

You just did the same thing to me in the sex strike thread, you jackass.

So, you’re either A. a real dumbass who can’t even keep up with the conversation or B. a disingenuous troll who obfuscates and dodges rather than actually discuss the topic.

Either way, you’re not worth engaging.

__________________

Quote:

And as for you, brothers and sisters, never tire of doing what is right.2 Thess 3:13

Quote:

"Here rests in honored glory, a comrade in arms known but to God”.Unknown Soldiers gravestone, Normandy American Cemetery, Normandy France